Silva vs Sonnen Thoughts?

i haven't liked andy since his first fight in the UFC. and me being a juggalo i would love to bury the hatchet "with" andy

No room for Juggalos in mma.. get lost

No need to be a prick. Some people make some really lame life choices - better to be subtle with your insults, they hurt more, and won't get you in trouble

That being said, I didn't know 'juggalos' existed. I thought they were just paid actors employed by that shite 'ICP' group. Faggy 2 Dope and Silent Gay as Eminem put it.

jakewalters

7/8/12 7:57:21PM

warglory

7/8/12 8:14:24PM

Posted by prophecy033

Posted by Adam_Buru

Posted by warglory

That was a good fight. I honestly believe that had Sonnen not been cocky and thrown that spinning backfist, it would have been a different fight, but props to Silva for taking advantage of the situation, that's what makes him the champ.

I totally agree with this. Chael was winning the fight quite comfortably until he made the stupid mistake of going for that spinning back-fist.

Chael is the only fighter that makes Anderson look ordinary.

And Anderson made Chael eat his words. I don't care if Chael.was winning the fitter, he lose AGAIN and he needs to live with that

I don't think anyone is disputing this?

warglory

7/8/12 8:15:43PM

Posted by gartface

It's absolutely amazing to me that even after seeing the two guys bury the hatchet, and Chael humble after the fight, that some people still refuse to accept his trash talk as shtick. That's all it was people, time to stop being butt hurt. He gave Anderson Silva a lot of praise after the fight, because at that point he was done SELLING the fight and making himself money.

The fight went about as expected. I was surprised how easily Chael was able to just bum rush and get him on his back for the whole round, but it was inevitable that Silva was going to unleash on the feet.

Chael's undoing had nothing to do with Silva's abilities in the stand up.

warglory

7/8/12 8:17:08PM

Posted by PhilBrito

Posted by voodoo-jitsu

i haven't liked andy since his first fight in the UFC. and me being a juggalo i would love to bury the hatchet "with" andy

No room for Juggalos in mma.. get lost

Please go back to Sherdog.

warglory

7/8/12 8:20:20PM

Posted by jakewalters

Oh Chael. Such a silly move. I bet he has been punching himself in the face all day today for that one.

aussiemma

7/8/12 9:00:26PM

Posted by Aether

Posted by aussiemma

the knee was illegal ! caught him on the chin, sonnen was robbed !

You should tell that to Sonnen, because in the post-fight interview he clearly states that "he got me with a knee to the body".

i was joking because everyone was saying it was legal over and over again. obviously to the body after they showed the replay

infestructure

7/8/12 11:21:19PM

Posted by warglory

Posted by gartface

It's absolutely amazing to me that even after seeing the two guys bury the hatchet, and Chael humble after the fight, that some people still refuse to accept his trash talk as shtick. That's all it was people, time to stop being butt hurt. He gave Anderson Silva a lot of praise after the fight, because at that point he was done SELLING the fight and making himself money.

The fight went about as expected. I was surprised how easily Chael was able to just bum rush and get him on his back for the whole round, but it was inevitable that Silva was going to unleash on the feet.

Chael's undoing had nothing to do with Silva's abilities in the stand up.

Because Silva didn't use his stand up abilities to dodge Sonnen's backfist or anything like that. Stand up also includes movement, not just strikes.

warglory

7/9/12 7:42:04AM

Posted by infestructure

Posted by warglory

Posted by gartface

It's absolutely amazing to me that even after seeing the two guys bury the hatchet, and Chael humble after the fight, that some people still refuse to accept his trash talk as shtick. That's all it was people, time to stop being butt hurt. He gave Anderson Silva a lot of praise after the fight, because at that point he was done SELLING the fight and making himself money.

The fight went about as expected. I was surprised how easily Chael was able to just bum rush and get him on his back for the whole round, but it was inevitable that Silva was going to unleash on the feet.

Chael's undoing had nothing to do with Silva's abilities in the stand up.

Because Silva didn't use his stand up abilities to dodge Sonnen's backfist or anything like that. Stand up also includes movement, not just strikes.

It was Sonnen's choice to use the spinning backfist, a wild uncalculated maneuver, that was his undoing. Silva was doing what Silva does best, capitalizing on his victims, but it was Sonnen's ego that lost him that fight.

twodragunns

7/9/12 5:02:47PM

Sonnen's sloppy spinning backfist mistake definitely cost him this fight and quite likely his last shot at UFC gold. The first round was much like the last fight with Chael controlling the fight from top position and g & p on Silva. The second round was much different with Silva stuffing Chael's double attempt and capitalizing on Chael's sloppy error. Is there a MW that can ever beat this guy? Maybe Lombard will really challenge Silva if he gets the opportunity. Wanted Sonnen to win this fight, but it wasn't to be.

I disagree. I'll start by saying that I enjoy Chael's banter as much as the next person, but I was never disillusioned into thinking Chael would win. In my mind, Anderson wasn't 100% last time, so I figured 2nd round TKO would be about right. Sure enough, got my 11 points...hell, even won some money. So, I assure you, my view has nothing to do with who won the fight. It has to do with the fact that Chael appeared to eat some quad in the replay. Did the point of the knee strike Chael in the head? No. But what constitutes a knee? Just as the forearm is part of an elbow strike, why would people not consider the thigh to be part of the knee? After all, that's where most of the force is connecting when a knee is thrown. I'm just merely calling for a closer look at what connected along with what is actually considered a knee strike within the rules...or whether the rules even stipulate that sort of detail.

lohmann

7/9/12 6:40:07PM

Posted by grappler0000

Chael appeared to eat some quad in the replay. Did the point of the knee strike Chael in the head? No. But what constitutes a knee? Just as the forearm is part of an elbow strike, why would people not consider the thigh to be part of the knee? After all, that's where most of the force is connecting when a knee is thrown. I'm just merely calling for a closer look at what connected along with what is actually considered a knee strike within the rules...or whether the rules even stipulate that sort of detail.

Parsing definitions is going to open a whole can of worms if a hearing materializes. If there's a need for a rule change as the NSAC (and by extension Unified Rules in general) tries to define what constitutes a knee as more than the joint between the femur and fibula I hope they do not penalize somebody in retrospect.

Chael appeared to eat some quad in the replay. Did the point of the knee strike Chael in the head? No. But what constitutes a knee? Just as the forearm is part of an elbow strike, why would people not consider the thigh to be part of the knee? After all, that's where most of the force is connecting when a knee is thrown. I'm just merely calling for a closer look at what connected along with what is actually considered a knee strike within the rules...or whether the rules even stipulate that sort of detail.

Parsing definitions is going to open a whole can of worms if a hearing materializes. If there's a need for a rule change as the NSAC (and by extension Unified Rules in general) tries to define what constitutes a knee as more than the joint between the femur and fibula I hope they do not penalize somebody in retrospect.

Not to worry...the odds of the commission even entertaining the idea that one of their officials made a bad call is not likely.

Pookie

7/9/12 9:23:00PM

Posted by grappler0000

Not to worry...the odds of the commission even entertaining the idea that one of their officials made a bad call is not likely.

Thank god for that

ncordless

7/10/12 12:34:18AM

Posted by grappler0000

Posted by lohmann

Posted by grappler0000

Chael appeared to eat some quad in the replay. Did the point of the knee strike Chael in the head? No. But what constitutes a knee? Just as the forearm is part of an elbow strike, why would people not consider the thigh to be part of the knee? After all, that's where most of the force is connecting when a knee is thrown. I'm just merely calling for a closer look at what connected along with what is actually considered a knee strike within the rules...or whether the rules even stipulate that sort of detail.

Parsing definitions is going to open a whole can of worms if a hearing materializes. If there's a need for a rule change as the NSAC (and by extension Unified Rules in general) tries to define what constitutes a knee as more than the joint between the femur and fibula I hope they do not penalize somebody in retrospect.

Not to worry...the odds of the commission even entertaining the idea that one of their officials made a bad call is not likely.

Even if there was incidental contact with the quad (which there might have been), and the rule against knees and/or kicks to the head of a downed opponent is read to include contact with the quad (which it probably should be in situations where the fighter is kicking or kneeing . . . it can't be just any contact or else triangle chokes are illegal), it doesn't matter. For a fight result to be overturned because of a foul, the foul must have been caused the result. Here, while the knee was most likely the causal strike that ended the fight, the knee was legal and to the chest. For the fight to be overturned, the quad to the face, which is the foul, would have to be the thing that caused the result. Chael wasn't finished by a quad to the face, but rather a knee to the chest.

grappler0000

7/10/12 12:37:22PM

Posted by ncordless

Posted by grappler0000

Posted by lohmann

Posted by grappler0000

Chael appeared to eat some quad in the replay. Did the point of the knee strike Chael in the head? No. But what constitutes a knee? Just as the forearm is part of an elbow strike, why would people not consider the thigh to be part of the knee? After all, that's where most of the force is connecting when a knee is thrown. I'm just merely calling for a closer look at what connected along with what is actually considered a knee strike within the rules...or whether the rules even stipulate that sort of detail.

Parsing definitions is going to open a whole can of worms if a hearing materializes. If there's a need for a rule change as the NSAC (and by extension Unified Rules in general) tries to define what constitutes a knee as more than the joint between the femur and fibula I hope they do not penalize somebody in retrospect.

Not to worry...the odds of the commission even entertaining the idea that one of their officials made a bad call is not likely.

Even if there was incidental contact with the quad (which there might have been), and the rule against knees and/or kicks to the head of a downed opponent is read to include contact with the quad (which it probably should be in situations where the fighter is kicking or kneeing . . . it can't be just any contact or else triangle chokes are illegal), it doesn't matter. For a fight result to be overturned because of a foul, the foul must have been caused the result. Here, while the knee was most likely the causal strike that ended the fight, the knee was legal and to the chest. For the fight to be overturned, the quad to the face, which is the foul, would have to be the thing that caused the result. Chael wasn't finished by a quad to the face, but rather a knee to the chest.

Oh, I was never asking for the commission to overturn anything...just merely pointing out that the knee isn't as black and white as many are saying. But contact during a legal move and contact during a "potentially" illegal move are quite different. In fact, contact with the thigh (assuming that constitutes part of the knee) in this scenario would be what actually deems it legal or illegal...by definition.

I don't completely understand your last sentence though. What qualifies us as fans to determine how much of the impact his head absorbed? All I'm saying is that it deserves a closer look than most are giving.

ncordless

7/10/12 1:29:25PM

Posted by grappler0000

Posted by ncordless

Posted by grappler0000

Posted by lohmann

Posted by grappler0000

Chael appeared to eat some quad in the replay. Did the point of the knee strike Chael in the head? No. But what constitutes a knee? Just as the forearm is part of an elbow strike, why would people not consider the thigh to be part of the knee? After all, that's where most of the force is connecting when a knee is thrown. I'm just merely calling for a closer look at what connected along with what is actually considered a knee strike within the rules...or whether the rules even stipulate that sort of detail.

Parsing definitions is going to open a whole can of worms if a hearing materializes. If there's a need for a rule change as the NSAC (and by extension Unified Rules in general) tries to define what constitutes a knee as more than the joint between the femur and fibula I hope they do not penalize somebody in retrospect.

Not to worry...the odds of the commission even entertaining the idea that one of their officials made a bad call is not likely.

Even if there was incidental contact with the quad (which there might have been), and the rule against knees and/or kicks to the head of a downed opponent is read to include contact with the quad (which it probably should be in situations where the fighter is kicking or kneeing . . . it can't be just any contact or else triangle chokes are illegal), it doesn't matter. For a fight result to be overturned because of a foul, the foul must have been caused the result. Here, while the knee was most likely the causal strike that ended the fight, the knee was legal and to the chest. For the fight to be overturned, the quad to the face, which is the foul, would have to be the thing that caused the result. Chael wasn't finished by a quad to the face, but rather a knee to the chest.

Oh, I was never asking for the commission to overturn anything...just merely pointing out that the knee isn't as black and white as many are saying. But contact during a legal move and contact during a "potentially" illegal move are quite different. In fact, contact with the thigh (assuming that constitutes part of the knee) in this scenario would be what actually deems it legal or illegal...by definition.

I don't completely understand your last sentence though. What qualifies us as fans to determine how much of the impact his head absorbed? All I'm saying is that it deserves a closer look than most are giving.

Why does it deserve a closer look? Even if there was contact between the face and the quad, that contact did not dictate the outcome, therefore it is immaterial. I don't think incidental contact between the upper leg and the face is a foul. And while I might be just a fan, nearly 20 years of watching MMA has given me pretty good insight into things. Among those things is that when a person takes a blow to the head, their head snaps back. Chael does the opposite, he crumples in.

Unless the quad touching the face caused the fight to end, it doesn't matter at all because that's the only thing that would cause the result to be overturned.

grappler0000

7/10/12 2:38:36PM

Posted by ncordless

Posted by grappler0000

Posted by ncordless

Posted by grappler0000

Posted by lohmann

Posted by grappler0000

Chael appeared to eat some quad in the replay. Did the point of the knee strike Chael in the head? No. But what constitutes a knee? Just as the forearm is part of an elbow strike, why would people not consider the thigh to be part of the knee? After all, that's where most of the force is connecting when a knee is thrown. I'm just merely calling for a closer look at what connected along with what is actually considered a knee strike within the rules...or whether the rules even stipulate that sort of detail.

Parsing definitions is going to open a whole can of worms if a hearing materializes. If there's a need for a rule change as the NSAC (and by extension Unified Rules in general) tries to define what constitutes a knee as more than the joint between the femur and fibula I hope they do not penalize somebody in retrospect.

Not to worry...the odds of the commission even entertaining the idea that one of their officials made a bad call is not likely.

Even if there was incidental contact with the quad (which there might have been), and the rule against knees and/or kicks to the head of a downed opponent is read to include contact with the quad (which it probably should be in situations where the fighter is kicking or kneeing . . . it can't be just any contact or else triangle chokes are illegal), it doesn't matter. For a fight result to be overturned because of a foul, the foul must have been caused the result. Here, while the knee was most likely the causal strike that ended the fight, the knee was legal and to the chest. For the fight to be overturned, the quad to the face, which is the foul, would have to be the thing that caused the result. Chael wasn't finished by a quad to the face, but rather a knee to the chest.

Oh, I was never asking for the commission to overturn anything...just merely pointing out that the knee isn't as black and white as many are saying. But contact during a legal move and contact during a "potentially" illegal move are quite different. In fact, contact with the thigh (assuming that constitutes part of the knee) in this scenario would be what actually deems it legal or illegal...by definition.

I don't completely understand your last sentence though. What qualifies us as fans to determine how much of the impact his head absorbed? All I'm saying is that it deserves a closer look than most are giving.

Why does it deserve a closer look? Even if there was contact between the face and the quad, that contact did not dictate the outcome, therefore it is immaterial. I don't think incidental contact between the upper leg and the face is a foul. And while I might be just a fan, nearly 20 years of watching MMA has given me pretty good insight into things. Among those things is that when a person takes a blow to the head, their head snaps back. Chael does the opposite, he crumples in.

Unless the quad touching the face caused the fight to end, it doesn't matter at all because that's the only thing that would cause the result to be overturned.

Without looking further into it, how could one even make that determination? It's a catch 22. Again though, I'm not looking to overturn anything. A foul is a foul though. There is nothing in the rules that states it is only illegal to knee a downed opponent in the head, if you don't do too much damage. Either it's a foul or it's not. Too much emphasis is being placed on how much damage it did to his head vs his chest. That would only come into play if the ref had stopped the action to assess. He did not, so what we are left to discuss is whether it was actually a foul or not.

For the record though, his head did snap back. It bounced off of the cage, as it had nowhere else to go.

tmas

7/10/12 5:41:57PM

for the record it was a legal knee its been proven get over it.

LightsOUT23

7/11/12 8:00:31AM

That spinning back fist was the start of the end for Chael. Its almost a bit unusual for Chael to be throwing such wild out of character moves. And he fell down so easily. That spinning back fist was thrown out of sheer frustration, and landing on his ass like he did gave Silva the opportunity to pounce and end the fight. Well done Chael, you are the MW champion at smack talking, you talked yourself into the biggest paycheck of your career, then bottled it knowing you couldn't win. You looked for a way out, Throwing that spinning back fist was it !!! Congratulations Chael.

Adrenaline

7/11/12 8:15:59AM

Posted by LightsOUT23bottled it knowing you couldn't win. You looked for a way out, Throwing that spinning back fist was it !!! Congratulations Chael.

You sir, are an imbecile.

LightsOUT23

7/11/12 9:50:27AM

Posted by Adrenaline

Posted by LightsOUT23bottled it knowing you couldn't win. You looked for a way out, Throwing that spinning back fist was it !!! Congratulations Chael.

You sir, are an imbecile.

Thank you !!!

Adrenaline

7/11/12 7:05:08PM

Posted by LightsOUT23

Posted by Adrenaline

Posted by LightsOUT23bottled it knowing you couldn't win. You looked for a way out, Throwing that spinning back fist was it !!! Congratulations Chael.

You sir, are an imbecile.

Thank you !!!

Your very welcome

Sorry about name calling, I just hope you were not being serious with that statement.

LightsOUT23

7/12/12 6:24:38PM

Posted by Adrenaline

Posted by LightsOUT23

Posted by Adrenaline

Posted by LightsOUT23bottled it knowing you couldn't win. You looked for a way out, Throwing that spinning back fist was it !!! Congratulations Chael.

You sir, are an imbecile.

Thank you !!!

Your very welcome

Sorry about name calling, I just hope you were not being serious with that statement.

Not 100% serious, but i do believe Sonnen was looking for a quick exit on that big payday !!!